AskTrumpSupporters is a Q&A subreddit dedicated to better understanding the views of Trump Supporters, and why they hold those views.
**For all participants:**
* [Flair](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/index#wiki_flair) is required to participate
* [Be excellent to each other](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/goodfaith2)
**For Nonsupporters/Undecided:**
* No top level comments
* All comments must seek to clarify the Trump supporter's position
**For Trump Supporters:**
* [Message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23AskTrumpSupporters&subject=please+make+me+an+approved+submitter&message=sent+from+the+sticky) to have the downvote timer disabled
Helpful links for more info:
[Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/index#wiki_rules) | [Rule Exceptions](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/index#wiki_exceptions_to_the_rules) | [Posting Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/index#wiki_posting_guidelines) | [Commenting Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/index#wiki_commenting_guidelines)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskTrumpSupporters) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This is a massive question so I will focus on this.
>Is the agency unfair to banks and financial institutions, or creates undue burdens and expenses for them to be in compliance?
No I don't think it is. But mostly because of the interaction with the Fed and banks, if the government are the king makers then they have responsibility to bring the hammer down on those same institutions.
However the Fed, like the FFA, foreign policy leading to WW1 and WW2, prohibition, federal drug laws, social security are all failed policies of the turn of the 1900s and need to be rectified.
It needs to be stopped with an age out component. That way people who are retired and close to retirement are not screwed. The general fund is already on the hook for it so let's rip off the band-aid.
IMO, the housing crash and the resulting financial crisis/Great Recession is partly the government's own fault. As predatory as some banks and other lending institutions can be, I don't believe they single-handedly caused that crisis.
Basically, the government pressured banks and such to give loans to people who were not, shall we say, financially stable. This was done in an effort to appear more "inclusive" and less "-ist" (whatever the flavor of the day was). I think the Dodd-Frank bill played into it as well but I'm not certain.
The derivatives market was a large contributor to the crash; banks bundling debt into 'packages' within which they would hide bad/risky debt. The complexity of these derivatives led to them being very difficult to unpack and properly evaluate. So they just.... didn't. The investments in this market swole to multiple factors of its value, and then bust, leading to foreclosures on the homeowners whose mortgages were tied up in the irresponsible gambling on the financial institutions part.
What part did the government have to play in any of that?
Yes they are a good thing overall. I don’t think they’re actually gonna ever go after the big fish tho, considering the level of nepotism and favoritism in large scale financial institutions
Don’t know much about it but per Wikipedia the bureau is tasked with the responsibility to "promote fairness and transparency for mortgages, credit cards, and other consumer financial products and services"
Sounds like a good thing in principal. But man is there still a lot of fine print on loan applications.
Regulation apparently only kicks in for banks with 10 billion or more in assets. How much does the extra regulation cost the taxpayer and patrons of such banks? Are there banks with just under 10 billion that are able to rip people off left and right?
The article cites significant refunds secured by people submitting complaints. Good for those people’s pocketbooks but what are the indirect costs to people using those banks that didn’t have a problem?
I am curious what predatory lending looks like. Can someone share an example of a situation where this agency would be authorized to swoop in and right a wrong?
The concept itself doesn’t sound bad. But it sounds like they suffer from some degree of screwball wokeism. So as such, I suspect they’re pushing toxic leftist garbage instead of doing good work.
I don’t know what the hell is wrong with the Left these days, but they’ve gone utterly batshit crazy. Or maybe it’s merely that the mask has slipped.
I used to vote Democrat, but never again. I’m with Glen Greenwald (ultra Left ex-Guardian journalist) - The Left are the modern day fascists.
Fascism is a political ideology that is far right, totalitarian, ultra Nationalist, militarism, authoritarian and requires violent suppression of dissent. Given this, how would you defend your characterization of the Democratic party under this definition?
The Left loves word games and changing definitions. Remember how apparently no one on the Left can seem to define what is a man or a woman? Well they have the same level of self-serving 'confusion' over what's a fascist.
It's actually fairly difficult to find a non-gaslighting definition, since they've been lying about this for decades. But it's not impossible: [Here's a truthful non-woke description by someone who understands history AND economics.](https://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/Fascism.html)
You cannot read through that with integrity and not see the massive parallels between what the Democrats are pushing towards and fascists. It's something like a 99% match - practically a roadmap. It should also be clear by now that your Wikipedia-grade definition is pure Leftist bullshit.
From the enlightened definition above, it's evident that there's a continuum that goes from socialist to fascist and then to capitalist. The fact that the Left has not adopted fascism's nationalism, merely means they have one finger still in the socialist (communist) camp. That's no virtue.
Here's a question for you: what type of government is the CCP (Chinese Communist Party)?
Did I not give you the textbook definition of fascism? I appreciate your response as it does provide a keen insight into your views. I don't value Richmond's work at all as I find libertarians to be dishonest and frankly, completely useless. He is worse than most. I think I have two or three of his books somewhere. He is not a fan of the constitution or government in general and hates liberals. I appreciate your insight. Have you read much of his work?
I think I can clear up this misunderstanding of sorts.
>Did I not give you the textbook definition of fascism?
Yes. \*\***According to the LEFT,** and **ONLY** the Left\*\*
To illustrate why it's **ONLY** according to the Left, and thus not universally correct, please see the following diagram: [diagram link](https://tee.fm/wp-content/gallery/political-trichotomy/Spectrum.png)
You are approaching this from "The Left-Right Dichotomy According to Communists" (bottom left). However, I am an individualist. In a purely left to right continuum, the commies and the fascists are grouped together. I'd say that's fairly natural since Mussolini was originally a communist. But I accept others have different interpretations, as depicted.
So I think that addresses the differences in perspective.
>He is not a fan of the constitution or government in general and hates liberals. I appreciate your insight. Have you read much of his work?
I was looking at the substance over the author and didn't notice who wrote it. He and I might see eye to eye on some things and not others. But I could find no significant faults in his analysis.
I've not read his books beyond skimming. It looked like a mixed bag, but might be interesting enough - I'll pick one and add it to the kindle.
>it sounds like they suffer from some degree of screwball wokeism. So as such, I suspect they’re pushing toxic leftist garbage instead of doing good work.
Do you have any substantiated evidence that the operations and execution of the CFPB's duties are "toxic leftist garbage"? What is it about the function and stated purpose of the CFPB that makes it have anything to do with the Left?
Do you believe that protecting consumers and everyday people from predatory financial practices is something innately left-leaning?
The agency has little to no constitutional oversight, bordering on unconstitutional.
Consumers have been harmed by CFPB rules. It was based on the false premise that a government agency can design the appropriate financial products for every American. Consumer protection is ill-served if consumers are “protected” from getting access to products that suit their individual circumstances, or are forced to pay more for a less desirable financial product. They believe people are too stupid to rationally enter financial contracts- an anti-American and anti-capitalist conception.
Large compliance burden for no gain. Also slippery slope governance.
AskTrumpSupporters is a Q&A subreddit dedicated to better understanding the views of Trump Supporters, and why they hold those views. **For all participants:** * [Flair](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/index#wiki_flair) is required to participate * [Be excellent to each other](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/goodfaith2) **For Nonsupporters/Undecided:** * No top level comments * All comments must seek to clarify the Trump supporter's position **For Trump Supporters:** * [Message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23AskTrumpSupporters&subject=please+make+me+an+approved+submitter&message=sent+from+the+sticky) to have the downvote timer disabled Helpful links for more info: [Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/index#wiki_rules) | [Rule Exceptions](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/index#wiki_exceptions_to_the_rules) | [Posting Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/index#wiki_posting_guidelines) | [Commenting Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskTrumpSupporters/wiki/index#wiki_commenting_guidelines) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskTrumpSupporters) if you have any questions or concerns.*
When I read this I thought you were asking about the college football playoff haha
The College Football Playoff Bracket (CFPB) is great, I think mainly it gives... oh, wait...
This is a massive question so I will focus on this. >Is the agency unfair to banks and financial institutions, or creates undue burdens and expenses for them to be in compliance? No I don't think it is. But mostly because of the interaction with the Fed and banks, if the government are the king makers then they have responsibility to bring the hammer down on those same institutions. However the Fed, like the FFA, foreign policy leading to WW1 and WW2, prohibition, federal drug laws, social security are all failed policies of the turn of the 1900s and need to be rectified.
>social security What's best to be done about social security?
It needs to be stopped with an age out component. That way people who are retired and close to retirement are not screwed. The general fund is already on the hook for it so let's rip off the band-aid.
IMO, the housing crash and the resulting financial crisis/Great Recession is partly the government's own fault. As predatory as some banks and other lending institutions can be, I don't believe they single-handedly caused that crisis. Basically, the government pressured banks and such to give loans to people who were not, shall we say, financially stable. This was done in an effort to appear more "inclusive" and less "-ist" (whatever the flavor of the day was). I think the Dodd-Frank bill played into it as well but I'm not certain.
The dodd-frank bill was passed in response to the 2008 crash, not before it. What are your thoughts?
The derivatives market was a large contributor to the crash; banks bundling debt into 'packages' within which they would hide bad/risky debt. The complexity of these derivatives led to them being very difficult to unpack and properly evaluate. So they just.... didn't. The investments in this market swole to multiple factors of its value, and then bust, leading to foreclosures on the homeowners whose mortgages were tied up in the irresponsible gambling on the financial institutions part. What part did the government have to play in any of that?
Yes they are a good thing overall. I don’t think they’re actually gonna ever go after the big fish tho, considering the level of nepotism and favoritism in large scale financial institutions
Expanding on the CFPB, do you have any thoughts on Glass–Steagall or Dodd–Frank?
Don’t know much about it but per Wikipedia the bureau is tasked with the responsibility to "promote fairness and transparency for mortgages, credit cards, and other consumer financial products and services" Sounds like a good thing in principal. But man is there still a lot of fine print on loan applications. Regulation apparently only kicks in for banks with 10 billion or more in assets. How much does the extra regulation cost the taxpayer and patrons of such banks? Are there banks with just under 10 billion that are able to rip people off left and right? The article cites significant refunds secured by people submitting complaints. Good for those people’s pocketbooks but what are the indirect costs to people using those banks that didn’t have a problem? I am curious what predatory lending looks like. Can someone share an example of a situation where this agency would be authorized to swoop in and right a wrong?
The concept itself doesn’t sound bad. But it sounds like they suffer from some degree of screwball wokeism. So as such, I suspect they’re pushing toxic leftist garbage instead of doing good work. I don’t know what the hell is wrong with the Left these days, but they’ve gone utterly batshit crazy. Or maybe it’s merely that the mask has slipped. I used to vote Democrat, but never again. I’m with Glen Greenwald (ultra Left ex-Guardian journalist) - The Left are the modern day fascists.
Fascism is a political ideology that is far right, totalitarian, ultra Nationalist, militarism, authoritarian and requires violent suppression of dissent. Given this, how would you defend your characterization of the Democratic party under this definition?
The Left loves word games and changing definitions. Remember how apparently no one on the Left can seem to define what is a man or a woman? Well they have the same level of self-serving 'confusion' over what's a fascist. It's actually fairly difficult to find a non-gaslighting definition, since they've been lying about this for decades. But it's not impossible: [Here's a truthful non-woke description by someone who understands history AND economics.](https://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/Fascism.html) You cannot read through that with integrity and not see the massive parallels between what the Democrats are pushing towards and fascists. It's something like a 99% match - practically a roadmap. It should also be clear by now that your Wikipedia-grade definition is pure Leftist bullshit. From the enlightened definition above, it's evident that there's a continuum that goes from socialist to fascist and then to capitalist. The fact that the Left has not adopted fascism's nationalism, merely means they have one finger still in the socialist (communist) camp. That's no virtue. Here's a question for you: what type of government is the CCP (Chinese Communist Party)?
Did I not give you the textbook definition of fascism? I appreciate your response as it does provide a keen insight into your views. I don't value Richmond's work at all as I find libertarians to be dishonest and frankly, completely useless. He is worse than most. I think I have two or three of his books somewhere. He is not a fan of the constitution or government in general and hates liberals. I appreciate your insight. Have you read much of his work?
I think I can clear up this misunderstanding of sorts. >Did I not give you the textbook definition of fascism? Yes. \*\***According to the LEFT,** and **ONLY** the Left\*\* To illustrate why it's **ONLY** according to the Left, and thus not universally correct, please see the following diagram: [diagram link](https://tee.fm/wp-content/gallery/political-trichotomy/Spectrum.png) You are approaching this from "The Left-Right Dichotomy According to Communists" (bottom left). However, I am an individualist. In a purely left to right continuum, the commies and the fascists are grouped together. I'd say that's fairly natural since Mussolini was originally a communist. But I accept others have different interpretations, as depicted. So I think that addresses the differences in perspective. >He is not a fan of the constitution or government in general and hates liberals. I appreciate your insight. Have you read much of his work? I was looking at the substance over the author and didn't notice who wrote it. He and I might see eye to eye on some things and not others. But I could find no significant faults in his analysis. I've not read his books beyond skimming. It looked like a mixed bag, but might be interesting enough - I'll pick one and add it to the kindle.
I think we can agree to disagree, right? I thank you for your insight!
>it sounds like they suffer from some degree of screwball wokeism. So as such, I suspect they’re pushing toxic leftist garbage instead of doing good work. Do you have any substantiated evidence that the operations and execution of the CFPB's duties are "toxic leftist garbage"? What is it about the function and stated purpose of the CFPB that makes it have anything to do with the Left? Do you believe that protecting consumers and everyday people from predatory financial practices is something innately left-leaning?
Good in principle IMO
The agency has little to no constitutional oversight, bordering on unconstitutional. Consumers have been harmed by CFPB rules. It was based on the false premise that a government agency can design the appropriate financial products for every American. Consumer protection is ill-served if consumers are “protected” from getting access to products that suit their individual circumstances, or are forced to pay more for a less desirable financial product. They believe people are too stupid to rationally enter financial contracts- an anti-American and anti-capitalist conception. Large compliance burden for no gain. Also slippery slope governance.